Louisiana Senator John Kennedy strongly endorsed a recent Supreme Court ruling that limited the use of nationwide injunctions, a decision that has stirred sharp debate across the political spectrum. Speaking on Fox News’ Faulkner Focus, Kennedy argued the ruling was not only a victory for the Constitution but also a sign of judicial restraint long overdue.
The Court’s 6–3 decision came in a case tied to challenges over birthright citizenship, but the ruling reached beyond that specific policy dispute. By striking down broad injunctions issued by lower courts against executive actions, the justices set a precedent likely to affect future administrations, regardless of party.
“Good Riddance” to Universal Injunctions
Kennedy applauded the ruling, saying that nationwide injunctions—court orders that block federal policies across the entire country—have no foundation in U.S. law.
“The Supreme Court has turned the universal injunctions into fish food, as well it should have,” Kennedy said. “There’s no basis in statute. There’s no basis in Supreme Court precedent. There is no basis in English common law for universal injunctions.”
He argued that such sweeping judicial actions allow individual judges to wield disproportionate power. “Judges who just dislike what Congress and a president—any president—has done just made them up,” he said. “And good riddance. I’m proud of the Supreme Court.”
